Google has reportedly delayed the launch of its forthcoming 7-inch tablet in an effort to lower its price to better compete with Amazon's $199 Kindle Fire.

The first Google-branded tablet is now expected to debut in July, according to The Verge, which will allow the search company to cut costs and sell the device for even less money. Google's original plans were to allegedly sell the device for about $249.

Though the tablet will be the first official Google-branded device in that category, the company will reportedly partner with Asustek to build the device with a 7-inch touchscreen. In its current form, it is said to feature an Nvidia Tegra 3 quad-core processor and run Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich.

But the $249 price of the current model is higher than the 7-inch , which is believed to be the primary competitor of Google's forthcoming device. Though the Kindle Fire runs Google's Android operating system, it is a heavily modified version of the software tailored to sell content direct from Amazon.com.

Google's apparent push to release an inexpensive 7-inch tablet also come as rumors persist that Apple is toying with the idea of releasing a smaller 7.85-inch iPad. Currently the iPad carries a 9.7-inch screen size, and pricing starts at $399 for the 16-gigabyte Wi-Fi-only iPad 2.

Apple is said to have a 7.85-inch model in its test labs with a 1,024-by-768-pixel display. By utilizing the same resolution and aspect ratio as the iPad 2 and first-generation iPad, such a device would allow developers' applications to be compatible without any modifications.

That would be a pretty stupid goal. The Fire is designed (and marketed) to be an effective conduit to Amazon's store and nothing else. Google can't compete there.

Agreed. I don't see this as targeting the Fire for the same reasons you mention. Instead I think it's hoped to jump-start Android-based tablet sales in general. Going by previous joint projects between Google and Samsung and Moto, this new one is probably just Google working with ASUS showing how they suggest it be approached while showcasing "pure" Android features. Really just another of the Nexus-type projects IMHO.

I know they are trying to keep it cheap (and I might buy one for $250) but I'm sick of the all fanboy hype around the Tegra 3 chip being quad-core. The new DUAL-CORE 28nm chips that use newer ARM architectures from Samsung, Qualcomm, TI, etc wipe the floor with Tegra 3, and its GPU is not great either.

so what's the pixel density of this thing? Seems pretty high. (I am referring to apple's smaller ipad in the works.) I am sure btw apple isn't simply toying with the idea, I am quite sure they will release a smaller ipad. I hope they don't cripple it in storage though.

They can sell a lot of units at the $199 price point. Good for them. But, if as reported, Amazon sells their Kindle at a loss, does Google really expect to sell theirs at a profit? Volume unit sales mean nothing if they sell every unit at a loss. And, if their goal is to drive customers from the iPad, well, there are anti-trust laws about such predatory pricing strategies. Good luck with that Larry. Your business strategies are increasingly under fire.

Question: I wonder how secure (from Google's prying eyes) your personal information and browsing habits, etc., will be on a Tablet Google sells at a loss? After all, their primary business is selling information. Particularly your information to their customers.

I don't understand why consumer electronics companies think beginning with an inexpensive device with inferior design and performance is a good strategy. Once an inferior device is delivered, many consumers will seriously consider whether or not the company can deliver a premium experience; the company will have effectively locked themselves out of the premium market.

Now, this is entertaining. Google is now competing with their vendors. Except, Amazon is not a vendor, are they? Amazon took the guts of the OS and did their own thing. The Kindle is not an Android tablet, though in surveys, I believe it is counted as an Android tablet when trying to make the iPad numbers look smaller.

Also, I hear that other vendors are going to start doing the same thing as Amazon. Google will be competing with all its faithful vendors.

On another note, do we know if the Fire has actually made any money? We know the hardware is sold at a loss. At what point does Amazon start making money. Will Google sell at a loss, or just build something super Janky?

Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...

Besides, this iPad 3 debacle's gonna sour people to the idea of tablets, anyway.

I understand what you mean.

The Retina Display with near perfect Color Gamut, 4G LTE, 5-megapixel iSight camera (with an ƒ/2.4 aperture and a five-element lens and hybrid infrared filter), dictation, over 200,000 apps and 10 hour battery life is clearly designed to discourage people from purchasing three million iPads the first weekend.

The Retina Display with near perfect Color Gamut, 4G LTE, 5-megapixel iSight camera (with an /2.4 aperture and a five-element lens and hybrid infrared filter), dictation, over 200,000 apps and 10 hour battery life is clearly designed to discourage people from purchasing three million iPads the first weekend.

At the same time, it's an awfully expensive device for the majority of consumers who are simply using tablets as a portal to the web.

It's the same reason why Apple continues to sell older models of the iPad, whereas they discontinue their computers when they release new hardware.

They can sell a lot of units at the $199 price point. Good for them. But, if as reported, Amazon sells their Kindle at a loss, does Google really expect to sell theirs at a profit? Volume unit sales mean nothing if they sell every unit at a loss. And, if their goal is to drive customers from the iPad, well, there are anti-trust laws about such predatory pricing strategies. Good luck with that Larry. Your business strategies are increasingly under fire.

Question: I wonder how secure (from Google's prying eyes) your personal information and browsing habits, etc., will be on a Tablet Google sells at a loss? After all, their primary business is selling information. Particularly your information to their customers.

Your browsing habits won't be any more safe from prying eyes than they are now with every other tablet and smartphone. Everyone wants to know who you are, where you are and your interests. There's no exceptions, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and developer's included. Note: Google doesn't sell your information. They offer their expertise in targeting ads to you or at least consumers that fit a profile like yours, based on what they know about your searches, interests and the like. A huge difference since your personal details don't leave their control.

As for selling at a profit, I wouldn't be surprised to see them sell close to break even, but not a loss. They aren't trying to mimic Amazon's market plan IMO.

As I mentioned in my earlier post I don't believe a Google-branded tablet is intended to be an overwhelming success anyway, nor intended to compete with any other specific tablet. I believe they want to showcase what's possible on an Android tablet, and what price points can be hit using their hardware build as an example. It's just like their use of Nexus smartphones. If the media doesn't pay attention and pump out articles and consumer's don't get the message then it will be a failure.

Your browsing habits won't be any more safe from prying eyes than they are now with every other tablet and smartphone. Everyone wants to know who you are, where you are and your interests. There's no exceptions, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and developer's included. Note: Google doesn't sell your information. They offer their expertise in targeting ads to you or at least consumers that fit a profile like yours, based on what they know about your searches, interests and the like. A huge difference since your personal details don't leave their control.

As for selling at a profit, I wouldn't be surprised to see them sell close to break even, but not a loss. They aren't trying to mimic Amazon's market plan IMO.

The reason they are not safe is because Google deliberately subverts protections to block access to your browsing habits that providers such as Apple provide in their browsers. And, not to split hairs but, there is little constructive difference between selling your name directly to an advertiser and selling the information needed to target you you via device IDs. It all still points to you. And, with access to the information trails, it is apparently not very difficult to track a person down.

So, no thanks. Google is a very untrustworthy guardian of personal information.

The reason they are not safe is because Google deliberately subverts protections to block access to your browsing habits that providers such as Apple provide in their browsers. And, not to split hairs but, there is little constructive difference between selling your name directly to an advertiser and selling the information needed to target you you via device IDs. It all still points to you. And, with access to the information trails, it is apparently not very difficult to track a person down.

So, no thanks. Google is a very untrustworthy guardian of personal information.

Google was reported to have removed the code that allowed the bypass, altho Apple themselves may not have gotten the message, reportedly ignoring that cookie delivery was turned off in this user's Safari settings.http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=261

... and I'm sure there are a lot of people on here who could extend this list for days on end.

Yep, you're correct about that!

I'm afraid to even mention what I paid for 12 megabytes of RAM a long, long time ago. So yeah, $500 seems incredibly cheap. It's so damn cheap, that I might even get a third iPad soon. I use them for musical purposes.

And, not to split hairs but, there is little constructive difference between selling your name directly to an advertiser and selling the information needed to target you you via device IDs. It all still points to you.

What evidence do you have that's what they do? My understanding is that Google does the ad placements, with the data itself allowing for targeted ads never leaving their control. That's why they're valuable to advertiser's. If they simply sold "the list" then the value to the chain would drop fast just like it did with the old mailing lists that ended up used several times and shared with other departments.

Do you have some link showing Google's really selling the data itself instead of placing/delivering the ads? I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood.

Only Google would come some stupid idea that been thought of by someone else. other people have thought this up before. ust another way for Google to market their stupid ideas so they can make money on ad clicks.

Google themselves haven't proven they can market hardware of their own design with success. I think Apple might come out with a 8 inch iPad for about the same amount of money or slightly more for a better system. Android can't even get their Ice Cream Samwich OS working properly. Google should stay away from marketing hardware, they just aren't qualified to do it.

Google themselves haven't proven they can market hardware of their own design with success. I think Apple might come out with a 8 inch iPad for about the same amount of money or slightly more for a better system. Android can't even get their Ice Cream Samwich OS working properly. Google should stay away from marketing hardware, they just aren't qualified to do it.

You're probably right, which is why I've said I don't think this is intended to be a big commercial success.

... and I'm sure there are a lot of people on here who could extend this list for days on end.

Here are some 1984 prices:

Cost of a new home: ..................$97,600.00
Cost of a new car: ......................$
Median Household Income: ........$22,415.00
Cost of a first-class stamp: ........$0.20
Cost of a gallon of regular gas ...$1.21
Cost of a dozen eggs: ................$1.01
Cost of a gallon of Milk: .............$2.26